Matt Gurney: Obama passes the commander-in-chief test

On Wednesday, CNN was running tape of National Guard soldiers rescuing women and children from flood-ravaged Hoboken, New Jersey. The entire thing was the exact opposite of what we saw in 2005 after Katrina, where footage of Air Force One flying over a dead New Orleans dominated the coverage.

There’s a particularly irritating term that has entered the American political lexicon — “the commander-in-chief test.” What this means, bluntly, is whether the voters can accept a candidate for the presidency would be an effective wartime leader. Barack Obama doesn’t need to prove that he could be the commander-in-chief. He is the commander-in-chief. But the federal response to Hurricane Sandy, thus far, has been an unsought opportunity to show the American people that they are safe in Obama’s hands.

The commander-in-chief test may be annoying — how can anyone know how someone would handle a national crisis until they’re in it? — but it exists for a reason. The President of the United States commands the world’s mightiest military force. American power keeps allies secure and the seas open to trade. And though few think of this anymore, 21 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, at this very moment, hundreds of American naval and air force officers are ready to fire off their nuclear missiles at a moment’s notice. These crews, beneath the waves in submarines and sitting inside ICBM control capsules and bomber crew readiness rooms, are waiting. Waiting for an order that may never come, but that the President can issue at any time. The man with the codes handcuffed to his wrist is never more than a few steps away. Voters can’t be blamed for considering this, even if their judgments are superficial.

But launching invasions and firing missiles isn’t the only way a leader can show they are up to the challenge. Effective management of a disaster can count just as much. Indeed, it might in some ways be easier — a president can never be held responsible for a storm or earthquake, only the federal response to it. That’s not true of wars and international incidents. By all accounts, while the situation is still unfolding, the United States is reacting efficiently and effectively to the impact of Hurricane Sandy. People who need to be evacuated are being evacuated. Troops and supplies are where they need to be. Obama will benefit from this.

That’s not entirely logical. The president doesn’t personally lead a relief effort anymore than they issue orders to battalions in the field. They have people who do that. But few things show off a federal government’s capabilities (or lack thereof) like major operations such as recovery missions. It’s political theatre, sure, but it’s effective political theatre. Voters don’t care about how FEMA is organized or about the co-ordination of local and state emergency agencies. They just want to know that their government isn’t dropping the ball.

All this came to mind on Wednesday afternoon. CNN talking heads were discussing the fact that President Obama had boarded a helicopter to survey damage along the New Jersey coast. Meanwhile, the network was running tape of National Guard soldiers rescuing women and children from flood-ravaged Hoboken, New Jersey. The entire thing was the exact opposite of what we saw in 2005 after Katrina, where footage of Air Force One flying over a dead New Orleans dominated the coverage.

Even though there are only days to go until the election, Obama found something that will help his election even more than campaigning. He’s not kissing babies. He’s on the job. And how’s the job going? Why, splendidly. Look at those soldiers helping evacuate people. It doesn’t matter if they’re state guardsmen. They make their commander-in-chief look good.

Romney, meanwhile, is trying to figure out how to campaign without looking like he’s campaigning.

As bad as the effects of Hurricane Sandy are, they’re not as bad as Katrina. And Obama inherited a federal government that’s far better prepared to handle a major disaster, thanks to the painful lessons learned from the earlier hurricane. Even so, Obama will be credited with a successful disaster response effort just days before the vote. And he frankly needed the help — recent polls have shown Republican challenger Mitt Romney pulling even with, or even ahead of, the president on national security issues, perhaps due to the administration’s bungling of the Benghazi attack.

There isn’t as much separating the foreign policy platforms of the two men as they pretend. America’s current economic weaknesses make much of its foreign policy a foregone conclusion. The commander-in-chief may rule the military, but events will rule him. Even so, the successful U.S. response to the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy will do nothing but help Obama. In a tight race that’s simply too close to call, it may make the ultimate difference come election day.